Statistical confusion impedes development

The story is in the British era. Once in British–administered Bengal, the government took an initiative to conduct a nationwide census of livestock. The purpose was to conduct a comprehensive and accurate census of the country's livestock. The cattle census began amid great enthusiasm across the country. Starting from the grassroots level, specifically the Union Council level, this census program is initiated. However, an unusual delay occurs in transmitting the livestock census directives to a union. The specified date for submitting the report to the Livestock Department at the Thana Livestock Office is only one day away when this directive reaches a Union. The chairman, upon receiving the directive for livestock census, becomes contemplative. He wonders how it is possible to gather the entire livestock data or statistics for the entire Union within just one day. Seated in his chair, the chairman puts his hand to his cheek, engrossed in deep thought. However, no viable solution presents itself.

At that moment, the union council's secretary enters the chairman's office. Seeing the chairman deep in thought, the secretary, in a humble manner, expresses curiosity about the nature of the problem that has the chairman contemplating in such a manner. The chairman remains silent in response to the secretary's inquiry. When the secretary repeats the same question the chairman, somewhat vexed, replies, "Tomorrow is the deadline for submitting the livestock census report. Now, what do I do?" Failure to report on time can lead to serious problems. And it is not possible to solve this impossible task in one day. The secretary smiled and said, "Is this too difficult, sir?” Give me this half-hour off today, and I'll get you the entire Union cattle count by tomorrow. The chairman somewhat hesitantly gave the secretary half an hour off.

The next morning, the chairman was waiting for the secretary. At that time, the secretary entered the chairman's room and said, sir, our union has 5000 cows, 3 thousand 500 goats, two buffaloes and 213 sheep. The chairman was very happy and sent the report to the Thana Animal Husbandry Department. The chairman survived a great danger. The chairman successfully averted a major crisis. He was very pleased with the secretary. But one thing worries the chairman. He wondered how the secretary could do the impossible. He called the secretary privately and asked, how did you do this impossible? The secretary said, "Was it really that difficult? I took leave of you and went to the nearby field. I counted the number of cows, goats, and sheep grazing there. The size of the field was something I already knew." By calculating the area of the field and determining the ratio of grazing cows and goats, I extrapolated the entire Union's livestock count. This is how I calculated the livestock assets for the entire Union. After a moment of silence, the chairman remarked, "Your calculations are all correct. However, two goats have been excluded from the count. One is me, and the other is you."

This is a fictional story. Therefore, searching for its truth is futile. However, the story is not devoid of a subtle message, as we are constantly victims of information distortion. Distinguishing between accurate and inaccurate information or misinformation is often challenging for us. Consequently, we find ourselves entangled in the web of confusion, merely spinning around in circles within the labyrinth of deception. However, accurate statistics are crucial for any plan or initiative, not only in our country but also globally, as worldwide statistical confusion is observed. I will attempt to illustrate how statistical confusion is misleading us. In any undertaking, having accurate statistics at the time of decision-making is indispensable. However, in our country, a segment of the population has been creating confusion by manipulating statistics to fit their own narratives. If you observe closely, those who disseminate such misleading statistics employ highly skilled tactics to avoid providing any opportunity for verification. They are spreading statistical disinformation in a very virulent manner.

Mughal emperor Akbar was a very prudent ruler. In his meeting there was a funny man named Birbal. His job was to please the emperor. Akbar sometimes tried to embarrass Birbal by asking strange questions. Once, during a gathering, Emperor Akbar asked Birbal, “Well tell me how many crows are there in Delhi? Birbal answered without any delay, there are 9 thousand 999 crows in the city of Delhi. If the count shows that the number of crows is more than this, then it must be understood that some guest crows have visited Delhi from outside. And if the number of crows is less then it must be understood that some crows of Delhi have gone outside. Upon hearing Birbal's response, Akbar realized that it wouldn't be easy to outsmart him. The strong presence of Birbal-like characters with witty personalities is evident among a certain class of intellectuals in our country.

A few years ago, a renowned economist in the country published information asserting that fake currency notes amounting to 5000 crore taka enter the domestic market of Bangladesh every day. This statistical claim, presented from various sources, faced criticism and challenges. I myself wrote an article challenging the information he provided, which was published in a widely circulated national daily. I had mentioned and substantiated with statistical evidence that if Tk 5000 crore fake currency notes enter the market every day, the total amount of counterfeit notes introduced in the market annually would exceed the Gross Domestic Product (GDP). Later, due to criticisms from various quarters, the authority provided a plausible explanation, stating that Tk 5000 crore fake currency notes do not enter the market daily; rather, the figure represents the number of times the fake notes change hands. This information was also misleading. In our country, there is a problem where even if someone disseminates misleading information, there is a lack of legal action against them. Especially when someone with government support publishes misleading information, instead of imposing penalties, they are often encouraged.

The same economist, a few days ago, published a statistic stating that after Bangladesh gained independence, 1 lakh crore taka has been smuggled abroad in the last 50 years. He probably did not consider that if 1 lakh crore taka had been smuggled abroad in 50 years, the annual amount of smuggled money would be 2,000 crore taka. However, the Global Financial Integrity (GFI), a research institution based in Washington, mentioned in one of their reports that only 64,000 crore taka is smuggled abroad from Bangladesh in international trade competition. Can we trust whose statistics? I can responsibly say that it is not possible to disclose the true amount of money smuggled, even in the case of money laundering, by any party.

Those involved in financial smuggling or money laundering never disclose the exact amount of their illicit funds. So, those who publish statistics of this nature, how do they obtain this information? Those who publish misleading information and statistics of this nature are well aware that their provided data or statistics cannot be challenged by anyone because there is no authentic information available on this matter. So, they publish all these statistics with great delight. In the current global scenario, money laundering is a widely discussed economic issue. Every country is concerned and contemplative about money laundering. The global increase in money laundering reflects the extensive expansion of worldwide malpractices. Those involved in money laundering engage in this activity to legitimize black money or illegal funds.

Money launderers never disclose the sources and amounts of their funds to anyone. However, there are some individuals who have voluntarily disclosed the amounts of their money obtained through money laundering. To know the exact amount of money laundered in Bangladesh each year, one would have to obtain statistics from various economists, and even then, their provided statistics may not be entirely accurate. Once, a responsible source claimed that in Bangladesh, each year, an amount ranging from 37% to 85% of the GDP is legitimized through money laundering. A former president of the World Bank once stated that globally, each year, a significant amount of money, ranging from 2% to 5% of the world GDP, is legitimized through money laundering. In numerical terms, this amounts to 85 billion to 200 billion US dollars.

The statistics provided above are not credible in any way, and there is no need to delve into further explanations to understand that. Generally, when presenting statistics, we rely on two decimal places. However, the gap between the utilized digits is very minimal. As we would if uncertain about any statistics, we might say between 10 and 12 or between 95 and 100. However, we never claim that it is from 85 thousand crore to 2 lakh crore of US dollars or from 37 percent to 85 percent. It is not at all desirable for a former president of the World Bank to give such strange statistics.

Bangladesh's statistical management is very weak, leading to the publication of misleading statistics. An interesting point to note is how our GDP growth statistics are being presented. The government always tries to show how the GDP growth rate can be increased. International organizations such as the World Bank, the IMF, and the ADB regularly publish potential GDP growth statistics for various countries, including Bangladesh, every year. If you observe, these organizations publish projections about Bangladesh's GDP growth rate that are one or two percentage points lower than what the Bangladeshi government presents or achieves. However, throughout the year, neither the government nor international organizations revise their provided statistics. In a specific year, the GDP growth rate can certainly vary, and there may not be just two or three fixed rates. The National Statistics Bureau of Bangladesh always endeavors to highlight the government's achievements, often trying to magnify them, while attempting to downplay the less impressive aspects.

The Statistics Bureau publishes pocketbooks annually containing concise information on various fields, but unfortunately, most people don't have much confidence in these statistics. The most unfortunate aspect is that the Bangladesh Statistics Bureau publishes a pocketbook every year called "Pocket Book on National Accounts." This book combines various data and information in a concise form. In the 1990s, I critically examined the three years' pocketbooks and found conflicting information about Bangladesh's land area. In these three years' books, the land area of Bangladesh is written in three different ways. When I contacted a senior official, he said that the land area mentioned in the annual books is indeed accurate, then it raises a critical question about the credibility of the Bangladesh Statistics Bureau. If the Statistics Bureau cannot accurately present the land area of Bangladesh, how can people place trust in them?

If there is uncertainty about any statistics and consensus cannot be reached, it is best not to mention such statistics. This avoids confusion among the public. Using terms like "abundant" or "significant" to describe a situation with uncertain statistics can convey a sense of precariousness. For example, instead of stating that money laundering is done with a substantial amount ranging from 85 billion to 200 billion US dollars annually worldwide, it would be more credible to avoid providing a specific amount. This would prevent people from falling into the trap of confusion and misinformation.

Author: Retired General Manager, Bangladesh Development Bank Limited and Writer on Economics